Add my vote to those who oppose the very harsh actions of the city fathers against the various merchants who have been caught in the “sting” operation of the local police in their zealous enforcement of the sale of alcohol to minors.

I fully agree to the law restricting sale of alcohol to minors. But I do have problems with the age restrictions of 21 years without consideration of circumstances. Flexibility of intent must be considered in all application of rules and laws.

Was it the intent of the server in these cases to circumvent the law? Are they guilty of criminal activity? If so, why are they not prosecuted?

Have the city fathers found that the owners/managers were involved to make profit, without regard to the law? Have they, the convicted, been offered a trial by their peers? Even a traffic violation affords this right.

And what about the under-aged breaker of the law? Does that youngster bear any responsibility? After all he/she is afforded the right to drive a vehicle on our public streets, and is held responsible for violation of those laws.

If I take my daughter out to a fine restaurant to celebrate her 20th birthday and order an alcoholic beverage to toast the occasion, am I not the lawbreaker who should be prosecuted, rather than the establishment?

My intent in all of the above questions is my concern that the law is imperfect. And that the city fathers are too intent on a situation which I find has limited negative effect upon our community and its citizens.

Do we have a problem of underage alcohol purchases in our city? If so let's include intent and all involved persons so the burden of the problem is shared by all who are responsible.

I ask that the city council rescind the regulation while refining the intent, and to suspend the reported action against those who do not bear the total responsibility. Fair is fair.

Stephen J. Feit

Fayetteville

Back to Opinion Home Page | Back to the top of the page